Jump to content

[1.11.x] SystemHeat - a replacement for the CoreHeat system (March 26th)


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Grimmas said:

That's too bad, I actually liked the fact that going interplanetary with Nerv was no longer the stock easy mode :)

It's still a SH reactor, but hopefully will provide a simpler progression - you would use it to figure out how to use a reactor that cools down/warms up (but doesn't need extra radiators) then the various KA engines come in with more. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Geryz said:

 

Weirdly enough the creator doesnt state which versions it's compatible with but I got the newest release which was 14 days ago and the newest version of KSP so that should be fine? Not sure though
I'm gonna try without KSH and see if that's the cause of the problem
Edit: It is. Guess I'll try to get support from the maker of KSH then or try to play without it for now

Hi, I'm an author of KerbalismSystemHeat.
Will try to fix this HeatControl radiators issue and update mod for last version of SystemHeat (this weekend maybe?).

If you run into a problems with KSH, feel free to PM me on forum or open issues on github.
Mod is experimental, as SystemHeat itself is under active development, so some issues will surely be present.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Judicator81 said:

Hi, I'm an author of KerbalismSystemHeat.
Will try to fix this HeatControl radiators issue and update mod for last version of SystemHeat (this weekend maybe?).

If you run into a problems with KSH, feel free to PM me on forum or open issues on github.
Mod is experimental, as SystemHeat itself is under active development, so some issues will surely be present.

Yep - no worries, just wanted to understand who might be using it. I've been playing pretty fast and loose with the API so if there are real users then I will try to be a bit more careful!

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nertea said:

Yep - no worries, just wanted to understand who might be using it. I've been playing pretty fast and loose with the API so if there are real users then I will try to be a bit more careful!

By the way, Nertea, do you still adhere to the principle "leave Kerbalism support for Kerbalism folks"?

The reason for I ask is, Kerbalism development is effectively on hiatus right now (both 3.* and 4.* branches), so no "built-in" SystemHeat (or FFT) support is expected in foreseeable future.
That's actually a reason for "middleman" mod like KerbalismSystemHeat to exist.

However, if you don't mind adding "native" Kerbalism support to SystemHeat (and hopefully FFT), I'm glad to help as much as I can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2021 at 4:19 PM, Nertea said:

No not really, the bug Wyzard found is affecting things.

Heat needs at full throttle. Use the thrust slider to change that.

You still need radiators for the passive power generation. However this is affected by the bug (if you turn off the reactor radiators don't work properly). 

Turns off the reactor when you go into time warp, turns it back on automatically after.

Lots of things changed in 0.4.0.

I mean fundamentally what changed from NFE was the following items:

  • Some automation was introduced to reactors overall, there was none before.
  • Reactor power actually adjusts slowly instead of instantly, this was intended but I never got it to work correctly without the stock thermal system murdering everyone and their children.

It's obviously taking some work to dial in the correct level of automation here.  Currently (assuming the bug gets fixed):

  • Engine reactors run at power levels of (usually) 5-100%, with power uprates of 10%/s and down rates of 20%/s
  • Turning reactors on (when no engine is on) will increase their throttle to minimum (5% ). This is 100 kW for the LV-N. They will melt down eventually at this level without radiators or propellant flow.
  • If the reactor can generate power, the minimum provides you with maximum power generation. I think the minimum is offhand 2% for these reactors.
  • When you increase engine throttle, the reactor will throttle up automatically to match the engine throttle, at 10%/s so will take ~10s to get to full power
  • When you decrease engine throttle, the reactor will throttle down automatically to match the engine throttle, down to the minimum value at 20%/s so will take ~5s to get to minimum power. 
  • You need to do something in that 5s or the reactor will melt down. Currently, the lower power reactors should survive a hard cooldown (e.g, the temperature increase in 5s of zero cooling will be below the meltdown threshold) without doing anything special. Higher power reactors will need a slower cooldown, using extra radiators or by slowly decreasing the engine throttle. 
  • Highest power reactors (gas core stuff) will need radiators to run at all.

What is missing here?

does the ISP of the engine depend at all on the reactor power? am I 'wasting' propellant while throttling up and down?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, toric5 said:

does the ISP of the engine depend at all on the reactor power? am I 'wasting' propellant while throttling up and down?

If you use automatic reactor control, yes. At 50% reactor power you get around 50% ISP. I spam coolant tanks on my engine so I can keep a high reactor power while fine tuning my maneuver.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...